Both the XL1 and the GL1 had a total of 270,000 pixels with an affective pixel count of 250,000 and I did complain at that time but I was only a teenager. The only time a lot of people started complaining about the pixel count is when the XL-H1 came out.

Look at the FX7 and the V1u, to me they both give you much better interlaced images outside than the Canon XH-A1 and its pixel count is much less than the XH-A1.

For all we know, their may in fact be a 720p mode in the JVC HD7 and we probably won’t find out until it’s almost released. JVC said there are extra features that they won’t mention yet. Even Sony didn’t want people to know that the V1u was capable of 24p when the V1e was announced.

Yes it is true that the Canon SD cameras did use pixel shift to create pixels. These chips however still had a good amount of pixels on them. Something like 540x480 pixels. That is about the same ratio as 1440x1080 such as the chips used in the Canon HDV cameras which also use pixel shift. This 1.333 shift in the horizontal isn't as big of a step as trying to go from 1/2 the horizontal and 1/2 the vertical. The Canon SD cameras didn't have that many pixels to try to fill in and a 1.333 ratio fits the norm of the level that pixel shift helps. I think the BBC did a study that said at best pixel shift gives you 1.4x extra detail but no 2x. Of course this isn't a bad thing at all and I'm sure the JVC camera will look great. The only thing I question on it is how usefull a 1920x1080 recording mode is when there is very little chance that pixel shift will give you that much more detail over 1440x1080.

18 is better than 35 lux ( GR-hd1 or JY-HD10U ) and they really didn't look that bad in low light. I've seen some nice shots in the dark with them (35 lux) under street lights that looked real good . I'm crossing my fingers

LHR

I think the problem is that not only was gain limited in 720p,, but that people don't retest cameras as they are refined over their manufacture life, and CCD's have had an dramatic boost in Lux performance over that time. But today we are used to lower lux rating than 18 lux for HD.

I would believe it is possible, because of the tiny 1/5 inch CCD's.

With Pixel shift

It depends on the quality of processing. The Panasonic GS75 (? or something like that) would have used it extremely for stills, and some comment was made on it's resolution. If done well, the resolution of most details could be processed up a lot more than the BBC study suggests (I imagine that it might have been based on average pixel shifting results on pro cameras, not special processing).

I imagine the single chip (cmos?) pro camera coming to NAB, will be much better, but this camera could indicate some of the things to look forward to. 720p50 progressive at 35mb/s might even be an possibility (no information, but an hope). The question now comes down to what after the HD250 in the three chip range?

There has been comment as to the technology not been upto H264 1080p. I think that their in house designs may not have been completed, but that Ambarella has had solutions for some time. The problems is that companies seem to have snubbed it, because it is not in house or in country. They seem to have tried their own designs, but the performance has not been their (do not know what quality the Panasonic is though).

We wonder why lots of new things don't get to the market, like Foveon X3 for Video cameras. The truth might be that they are not only at an premium, but suffer from the disadvantage that they are not in house, or in country, and not from established supplies to companies. That sort of culture in industry can be really restrictive for an new company to break in. Going to other countries and manufacturers is an potential solution.

I’ve noticed that about a week ago and I think its one of two possibilities. US will get one color while Japan will get the other but it’s most likely that you will be able to choose the color you want since both camcorders have the words Victor on them.
Maybe with this idea, JVC thinks they will get extra sales.

"Everything I've seen from JVC implies this is full native 1920x1080 from sensors to disk."

Nothing I have seen even suggests this. It claims recording 1920x1080 but clearly details the sensor to have substantially less resolution than this and use pixel shift to try to have an educated guess to the extra detail.